The "long arm of the law" is pretty short...

[FTA Lawyer]

Few people appreciate how arrest warrants operate in this country, and given the number of threads that discuss law and order issues, I thought I'd put out an example that I encountered this week.

A prisoner in Alberta phoned me saying he wanted to deal with outstanding criminal charges that he has in Ontario. There are warrants for his arrest for 6 separate offences that he committed out there before making his way West. This guy asked the prison officials out here to arrange to waive his charges out to Alberta so he could plead guilty to them and be sentenced.

The response?

The Alberta prison wouldn't do it because:

1) They couldn't make the arrangements fast enough before he would be released in a month; and

2) The warrants were not "returnable" out here so they would just be releasing him when his Alberta time was done.

The term "returnable" refers simply to the question of who will pay to bring a person in custody to the place where they are to appear in court. This guy's warrants were only returnable within 200 km of a particular Ontario town, so if he's arrested outside of that perimeter, the Province of Ontario will not pay for the flight (or train or bus etc.) to bring him back to face the charges.

Obviously, if the jurisdiction where he's wanted won't pay for getting him back, the jurisdiction he's arrested in isn't going to foot the bill, so out he goes into freedom, notwithstanding that there is an outstanding, valid arrest warrant.

So, every time he gets pulled over for speeding or asked to identify himself, this guy must be arrested due to the outstanding warrant, and each time he will be sent on his way after the police confirm that he is farther than 200 km from the Ontario town that wants him.

This is the true significance of having a "Canada-wide" warrant issued for your arrest, because it means the place that wants you will pay to bring you back from anywhere in Canada that you get arrested.

One can't help but wonder, how many times a month in a country as large as ours, with freedom of mobility as we have, are wanted criminals actually in police custody and nevertheless released simply because no one wants to open their wallet.

How does this strike the members of the forum?

FTA

[Black Dog]

One can't help but wonder, how many times a month in a country as large as ours, with freedom of mobility as we have, are wanted criminals actually in police custody and nevertheless released simply because no one wants to open their wallet.

How does this strike the members of the forum?

Well, I'd like to know what kind of crimes we're talking about. Murder? Rapes? Unpaid parking tickets?

[Leafless]

FTA Lawyer

You wrote- " How does this strike the members of the forum?"

This is unbelivable!

But sounds typically Canadian, but must be addressed.

Maybe you could explain FTA, why Alberta courts put this gut behind bars initially without checking 'First' for other Canadian arrest warrants to verify if he is wanted elsewhere or does this matter?

[sharkman]

This attitude strikes me as the typical Canadian justice system response. How inept.

[FTA Lawyer]

One can't help but wonder, how many times a month in a country as large as ours, with freedom of mobility as we have, are wanted criminals actually in police custody and nevertheless released simply because no one wants to open their wallet.

How does this strike the members of the forum?

Well, I'd like to know what kind of crimes we're talking about. Murder? Rapes? Unpaid parking tickets?

Good question...

The Ontario warrants were for:

1) Theft under $5,000 (x 2);

2) Breach of probation;

3) Breach of recognizance;

4) Fail to appear in court;

5) Theft of a credit card;

As a bigger-picture answer, the jurisdiction issuing a warrant can set its "returnabilitiy" as they see fit, so typically, the more serious the crime the wider the net (i.e. you're not going to see a Canada-wide warrant for parking tickets, nor are you going to see only a 200 km radius for a murder).

FTA

[FTA Lawyer]

FTA Lawyer

You wrote- " How does this strike the members of the forum?"

This is unbelivable!

But sounds typically Canadian, but must be addressed.

Maybe you could explain FTA, why Alberta courts put this gut behind bars initially without checking 'First' for other Canadian arrest warrants to verify if he is wanted elsewhere or does this matter?

Basically, as early as being stopped on the roadside and having your I.D. checked, any information connected to you on CPIC is instantly available to the police. The problem, of course, is if you are using an alias that has not yet been associated with your other identity, then the police may never know about your history.

I wasn't retained by the guy in my example, so I don't know his whole story, but it would appear that he did use an alias out here and it was not until he told prison officials about his outstanding warrants / charges back in Ontario that they would have had a chance to connect the dots.

In the normal course though, the CPIC check is the first thing to be done, and often the outstanding warrant is what the police will use to arrest the person (giving them some time to continue whatever investigation they are currently doing). Once it is determined though, that the warrant is not "returnable", the police will have to lay their own charges and proceed from there, or release the person.

So, either way, this guy would have been convicted and doing Alberta time before he would have had any chance to face his outstanding Ontario matters.

FTA

[Michael Hardner]

How does this strike the members of the forum?

This is a typical example of how things falls through the cracks via legislation and non-legislated policies and practices. I don't think it's typically Canadian - the same thing happens in the US, I"m sure.

This is the type of thing that should be changeable without new legislation.

[August1991]

It appears the guy used a stolen credit card to make purchases of less than $5000.

As always, we have a choice: we can pay the cost of moving guys like this around the country to face their sentence or we can live with the cost of not moving them around. (This second cost is presumably related to the loss to credit card thieves when they learn they can steal and skip town.)

Under $5000? I'd say it's cheaper to let the guy go free.

As a matter of curiousity, if he were returned to the jurisdiction in Ontario, what would be his likely sentence if he pled guilty? Is it possible to make him pay the travel costs as part of any penalty?

[FTA Lawyer]

It appears the guy used a stolen credit card to make purchases of less than $5000.

As always, we have a choice: we can pay the cost of moving guys like this around the country to face their sentence or we can live with the cost of not moving them around. (This second cost is presumably related to the loss to credit card thieves when they learn they can steal and skip town.)

Under $5000? I'd say it's cheaper to let the guy go free.

As a matter of curiousity, if he were returned to the jurisdiction in Ontario, what would be his likely sentence if he pled guilty? Is it possible to make him pay the travel costs as part of any penalty?

I hear what you are saying re: costs, but if we allowed economics to dictate decision-making in the criminal justice system, then frankly, we wouldn't prosecute any property-crimes that were of a value less than $30 to $40 thousand...and that is a huge portion of the crime out there.

My criticism really is this...if the crime is not serious enough to make it "worth" transporting the criminal, then the warrant ought to really be expunged from the system...I mean, why should a person be repeatedly arrested for something only to be released without charge? It's unfair to them, and wastes police man-hours and resources.

There's really no way of tracking this, but it would be interesting to see if there wouldn't be a net benefit to society in the end if we did transport people for every outstanding warrant (i.e. reduced recitivism, prevention of further offences etc.).

On your question about costs...

I had to do some research into some of the most unknown sections of the Criminal Code on this. For the most part, in practice, we consider costs to be something that do not get imposed in criminal proceedings...for either side. Again, this is a public policy decision...mostly to prevent the government from having to pay costs to an accused who gets acquitted notwithstanding that there was evidence of their involvement in a crime, and the public interest dictated that the Crown should prosecute.

There is, however, provision in the Criminal Code (s. 809 and 840) for a summary conviction court to add costs to a person's punishment as though imposing (or increasing) a fine. That being said, the schedule of allowable costs would appear to be so antiquated that it is actually laughable. For example, some of the items that a court can order be paid for the services of a police officer are as follows:

18. Arresting a person on a warrant or without a warrant.............$1.50

22. Returning with prisoner after arrest to take him before a summary conviction court or justice at a place different from the place where the peace officer received the warrant to arrest, if the journey is of necessity over a route different from that taken by the peace officer to make the arrest, each way, for each mile..........$0.10

24. Attending summary conviction court...for each day necessarily employed...........$2.00

So the answer to your question is technically a 'yes', but I mean, adding a few dollars in costs to a several hundred or several thousand dollar fine is quite pathetic.

As far as likely sentence, there's really no way to speculate with any validity because I don't really know the circumstances of the offence, nor do I know anything of the offender's past record or other circumstances.

FTA

[August1991]

I hear what you are saying re: costs, but if we allowed economics to dictate decision-making in the criminal justice system, then frankly, we wouldn't prosecute any property-crimes that were of a value less than $30 to $40 thousand...and that is a huge portion of the crime out there.

At first glance, it may not make sense to incur costs of $100 to impose a $5 fine on someone who steals a $10 DVD from Zellers but if it deters 10 other people from stealing, then it's worth it.

If low level property crimes are as common as you state, then it's probably worth it.

My criticism really is this...if the crime is not serious enough to make it "worth" transporting the criminal, then the warrant ought to really be expunged from the system...I mean, why should a person be repeatedly arrested for something only to be released without charge? It's unfair to them, and wastes police man-hours and resources.

I wondered the same thing. I suppose keeping the wrrants in the system mean that if he does anything serious in the future, they can add these charges too. But agreed the cops might waste alot of time on this, figuring it out and so on, each time he gets stopped. Then again, compared to prison, maybe that's a cheaper way to impose a penalty.

There's really no way of tracking this, but it would be interesting to see if there wouldn't be a net benefit to society in the end if we did transport people for every outstanding warrant (i.e. reduced recitivism, prevention of further offences etc.).

On your question about costs...

At 10 cents per kilometre, and if the sentence was a substantial fine, then costs might be covered.

The $2 per day is a joke. When was the law last revised? 1927?

I suspect that there are few cases like this where the accused has travelled half way across the country, and so nobody is worried about thieves escaping the long arm of the law. If it becomes a major problem, then the law will get changed in a decade or three. Then again, I simply dunno.

[Army Guy]

I think it's great, and if it had been my credit card he'd stole i'd be even happier, in knowing that ever time this guy gets pulled over he it cost him his own time, and money to get his life back on track.

I also agree about each province not paying for his transportation back to the scene of the crime. He's cost the taxpayers enough already.

If this guy was serious about putting his life back together let him take a bus back to Ont to get this sorted out. until then lets keep locking him up. Just a question what happens to this guy if he travels out of country, do this arrest warrents show-up on say the US police computers.

[sideshow]

Why would the police in Alberta (or elsewhere) keep arresting this fellow if his warrant is only 200k radius. 495 of CCC gives powers of arrest authority to police-but can they not use their discretion? if the cpic report comes up with a 200 k radius, that means the warrant is only valid within that 200k. knowing this, why would the police bother? would there not be a notation in cpic after the first time this fellow is stopped and dropped?

theft and fraud under being dual (indictable or summary) offences, this guy might see little to no jail time if sent to provincial court anyways.

the law should be revised to either a-provide for automatic transfer and payment for such, or b-dropping of the charges outside of the radius. maybe they could bill the offender?

[Wilber]

Seems typical. The cost to government is more important that the cost to society. That's the way our system has been working for years. It doesn't matter how many offenses someone has and the financial cost to their victims or society through higher prices and insurance rates. Any hit to a government's budget trumps it every time. Nobody really wants to know when it is actually cheaper to put someone in jail.

Army Guy

Tell that to the cop who spends his life arresting the same guys over and over again and doing hours of paperwork for nothing. Even if his arrest warrants show up in the US, they will just boot him back across the border. Why would they want our problem? Sane people made their immigration laws, they would have him back across the border in a heartbeat if it suited them.

[Argus]

Good question...

The Ontario warrants were for:

1) Theft under $5,000 (x 2);

2) Breach of probation;

3) Breach of recognizance;

4) Fail to appear in court;

5) Theft of a credit card;

As a bigger-picture answer, the jurisdiction issuing a warrant can set its "returnabilitiy" as they see fit, so typically, the more serious the crime the wider the net (i.e. you're not going to see a Canada-wide warrant for parking tickets, nor are you going to see only a 200 km radius for a murder).

FTA

Obviously it's not worthwhile bringing him back to Ontario. For a non-violent crime of a few thousand dollars in stolen goods we'd have to pay his air fare, almost certainly air fare for an escorting officer (exceeding the value of the stolen property right there), then cost of processing, incarceration before trial, trial and legal costs (thousands of dollars more), and all for what seems likely to be a suspended sentence or community service. At the end of which he's in Ontario, when they'd rather have him stay in Alberta.

It makes sense for him to be sentenced and punished in Alberta, but I can see where Alberta wouldn't volunteer the costs for that. As to costs - we know it affects everything about the crmiinal so-called justice system. It's what's driving all the community sentencing. And it's why prisons keep releasing violent and dangerous offenders into the community after serving a fraction of their time.

[Army Guy]

WIlber:

Tell that to the cop who spends his life arresting the same guys over and over again and doing hours of paperwork for nothing. Even if his arrest warrants show up in the US, they will just boot him back across the border. Why would they want our problem? Sane people made their immigration laws, they would have him back across the border in a heartbeat if it suited them.

Thats what he gets paid for, keeping these guys off the street, i would hope that after a few times of this guy getting arrested, spending some time in local jail until the cops sorted out what was going on ,that it would motivate the convict to get his life sorted out. What other measure do we have to make this bad guys pay thier debt for thier crimes. Perhaps adding the cost of his return to his new sentence would make sense.

I asked the question, to see if his traval outside the country would be impaired as well.

[theloniusfleabag]

Dear Argus,

It makes sense for him to be sentenced and punished in Alberta, but I can see where Alberta wouldn't volunteer the costs for that. As to costs - we know it affects everything about the crmiinal so-called justice system. It's what's driving all the community sentencing. And it's why prisons keep releasing violent and dangerous offenders into the community after serving a fraction of their time.

This is in part why I am a socialist. Costs are the central feature deciding all things in our lives, up to and including 'right & wrong'.

I have previously espoused the idea of the Army taking over incarceration/the justice system. For cases like this, the budget would be national, and responsibility for prisoner transfer costs wouldn't be regional.

[Wilber]

WIlber:

Tell that to the cop who spends his life arresting the same guys over and over again and doing hours of paperwork for nothing. Even if his arrest warrants show up in the US, they will just boot him back across the border. Why would they want our problem? Sane people made their immigration laws, they would have him back across the border in a heartbeat if it suited them.

Thats what he gets paid for, keeping these guys off the street, i would hope that after a few times of this guy getting arrested, spending some time in local jail until the cops sorted out what was going on ,that it would motivate the convict to get his life sorted out. What other measure do we have to make this bad guys pay thier debt for thier crimes. Perhaps adding the cost of his return to his new sentence would make sense.

I asked the question, to see if his traval outside the country would be impaired as well.

The job of the police is to safeguard the community not babysit criminals. We have one of the lowest number of police per capita in the western world. They really do have more important things which need their attention. That is supposed to be what we have prisons for.

You are right when you say it is their job to keep these guys off the street. It seems they are the only ones who are doing their job. That's the real problem.

[Wilber]

It is the Federal government that makes the criminal code. The Federal and Provincial governments run the court system and the prisons. By downloading their responsibility to the police they are shifting the cost to the municipalities. Same scam they as use at our borders. By not arming our border personnel who are on the federal ticket, they download that responsibility to the only folks around with guns. You guessed it, the local cops who are paid for by the property taxes of the the local border communities.

[August1991]

It makes sense for him to be sentenced and punished in Alberta, but I can see where Alberta wouldn't volunteer the costs for that.

All the witnesses and experts are in Ontario but you want a trial in Alberta? How much would that cost?

As to costs - we know it affects everything about the crmiinal so-called justice system. It's what's driving all the community sentencing. And it's why prisons keep releasing violent and dangerous offenders into the community after serving a fraction of their time.

Of course costs should be taken into account. What is the point of sending someone to prison for 6 months at $40,000 when the gain in deterence is a saving of only $20,000?

My greater fear is that costs are not taken into account. Many judges, parole board adjudicators and prison social workers ascribe to the "rehabilitation" ethos. We send criminals to "penitentiaries" so that they can "rehabilitate" themselves. These people don't believe prison is a deterence. They believe criminals are oppressed, mixed-up kids.

This is in part why I am a socialist. Costs are the central feature deciding all things in our lives, up to and including 'right & wrong'.

How else to determine what is right & wrong except by looking at what is more or less "costly"? I would think even Leftists would agree with that.

I have previously espoused the idea of the Army taking over incarceration/the justice system. For cases like this, the budget would be national, and responsibility for prisoner transfer costs wouldn't be regional.

I have previously espoused the idea that microwave ovens should no more be used to store food than the Army should be used to dispense justice.